What proof do Holocaust deniers have of their being no holocaust? (i'm open to hearing all arguments)?

I've been doing lots of reading about the Holocaust, the Nuremberg trials, and have went to the US Holocaust Museum twice.

But out of curiosity and openness to all sides, why do some feel there was no holocaust?

Update: Wow! I was looking for enlightment on the issue and it is exactly what I got!!!
I, too, have personal ties to some who were in concentration camps, which is why I have such an interest...but I wanted to hear both sides, coming into this truly believing in the Holocaust.
I will not call myself a denier, but I... show more Wow! I was looking for enlightment on the issue and it is exactly what I got!!!

I, too, have personal ties to some who were in concentration camps, which is why I have such an interest...but I wanted to hear both sides, coming into this truly believing in the Holocaust.

I will not call myself a denier, but I am going to definitely do more research, more reading. I have a trip planned to Austria this year, and will visit Dachau or Auschwicz (sp). In all fairness...everyone has great points...and so I will let this question go to a vote...

Follow

13 answers 13

Report Abuse

Are you sure you want to delete this answer?

Sorry, something has gone wrong.

Answers

Holocaust deniers do not argue that there was no killing of Jews or that there were no camps.
They argue that there were less people/Jews killed than currently claimed by the majority of historians and that the details of the death camps are inaccurate.

So they do not have to bring proof, they merely have to put doubt on some of the claims of the events and actions during the Holocaust.

And you rightly point out in your last sentence: they feel!!! there was no holocaust. They feel that they are unjustly 'prosecuted', 'haunted' by those people that want to make sure that the facts of the holocaust get remembered. Some are anti-semitic and have their own racist agenda.

EDIT to Vincent Apax
There were 6 concentration camps in greater Germany:
Dachau, Sachsenhausen, Buchenwald, Flossenburg, and after the annexation of Austria in 1938 - Mauthausen, finally in 1939 Ravensbrück (for women).
There were 6 concentration camps in Serbia:
* Banjica concentration camp (near Belgrade)
* Sajmište concentration camp (near Belgrade)
* Crveni krst (in Niš)
* Dulag 183 (in Šabac)
* Svilara (Pančevo)
* Paraćin
There were several camps in France:
During World War II, The French Vichy government ran what were called "detention camps" such as the one at Drancy. Camps also existed in the Pyrenees, on the border with pro-Nazi Spain, among them Camp de Rivesaltes, Camp Gurs and Camp Vernet. About 73,000 Jews were deported to Nazi Germany. In addition, areas which were annexed by Germany formally from France such as Alsace-Lorraine had concentration camps set up, the largest being Natzweiler-Struthof.

In Germany from 1934 onwards, every resident had to carry an ID card and every family had to have a family book proving their Aryan decent for at least 3 generations (I still have my family's book). so it is not difficult to find out how many German Jews were killed. It was more difficult in Poland and later in the War years since the speed with which events accelerated made it difficult for the German bureaucrats to maintain correct records.

The number of people killed is not an arbitrary number, it has been established after painstaking investigation over many years.
And even if, and I say if, there were only 3 million people killed by German government officials in ghettos, camps, shootings etc, this would make no difference whatsoever.

Why is it important how accurate the details are??????
You have to ask yourself. Would a person feel any better if they killed only 500 men, women and children instead of 50,000?

EDIT
Vincent Apex is incorrect
In German there is no term Death Camp only 'concentration camp' or 'work camps' for all camps that were build to either kill the inmates outright or work them to death. And in all the camps I mentioned, inmates were killed upon arrival or at the end of their usefulness.
There is a longer list of camps that were merely prisons or transition camps all over France Netherlands Italy etc.

And the fact that you are able to question the numbers killed in other genocides does not make it valid argument to question the number killed in the Holocaust. One only questions the number killed 70 years ago if one has a racist agenda, not if one wanted to find out the truth.

There is no need to mention camps across the US in this context, that is another topic.
Holocaust denial is illegal in these countries, because they suffered from it. These are countries that opposed Guantanamo Bay as well. These are countries that have signed the human rights declaration. These are countries that are actively working to prevent similar things from happening again.
Austria
Belgium
Czech Republic
France
Germany
Liechtenstein
Luxembourg
The Netherlands
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Spain
Switzerland

RE:
What proof do Holocaust deniers have of their being no holocaust? (i&#39;m open to hearing all arguments)?
I&#39;ve been doing lots of reading about the Holocaust, the Nuremberg trials, and have went to the US Holocaust Museum twice.

But out of curiosity and openness to all sides, why do some feel there was no holocaust?

They claim that the Holocaust never happened, or that if it did,the numbers killed are grossly exaggerated - in itself an inconsistent position,as the 2 arguments are not the same.This is an ideal example of the arguments of the Deniers,which are ramshackle,vague,and in consistent.They simply ignore all evidence that the Holocaust happened,or say that it is faked or lies,without producing any solid evidence.particularly in terms of primary sources and primary source documents. Not much of an argument really - it's not research,and it's definitely not acceptable as history.

Your all avoiding the question, personally I believe it happened I wasn't there to see it, I never met anyone who was there, I've never seen any physical primary evidence of it happening but I admit I believe it did because if I asked for that evidence I would be expelled from school and possibly put up on charges. Anyways, the point is that the only way people can seek the truth is by evaluating the evidence AS GOES FOR ANYTHING IN LIFE, never take the popular answer for anything as truth unless your heart truly believes it. Always make a decisions after you have evaluated the entire issue which could take a lifetime. However, because we dont have a lifetime. Holocaust deniers, refute the evidence of the number of jews that were killed; very few deny the entire holocaust(mainly people at the same intelligence as those posting on this board). Many argue over the documented and portrayed history of what physically happened, many agree that mass amounts were killed but the methods, amount of people, locations and personal accounts are not consistent between evidence taken by the Nurnberg trials, russian British and American authorities etc. Many deniers are not denier just refuting the evidence, but since anything slightly deemed antisemitic is a no touch topic they automatically lose and are dubbed "nazis" in the media. Remember children, history is written by the victors regardless of what jew died. Genocides are always nasty subjects to talk about, however differing accounts on the yugoslav, armenian, algerian, rwandan, native american genocides are even more common then the holocaust and some even more recent. However, these minorities have no prominence in the 21st century and are no entitled to have any footnote in history. Dont believe me check out your basic American history text book and see what the children of the 21st century think of how the U.S government opened up the west.

I feel that this question needs to be dissected pretty finely. I think that we have to ask what "Holocaust" actually means. Generally, it's referred to the purposeful murder of millions of 'undesirables' by German Nazis. It is not simply an act of genocide, it is the genocide of "six million Jews" and "six million 'others.' "

Personally, I feel that there is not close to enough evidence that six million Jews were killed. What is this number based on? What forensic evidence is there? I'm certainly not denying that there were concentration camps. I'm not even arguing against an organized attempt at genocide. What I'm saying is that the number "6 million" was forced into my head since I was a child, and the horror of the event stuck in my head to the point that I never questioned it.

Well, it's illegal to question any details of the Holocaust in the E.U. It is not illegal to question other acts of genocide, wherein more than 500 people were killed. Any murder is a sad and horrible thing. The details themselves are how the world theater responds to the perpetrating nation economically and politically. Personally, I feel that the right to questioning is the best part of the first amendment of my nation's constitution. It worries me that there are modern nations where such a right can be infringed upon

EDIT to D S: There were all kinds of concentration camps all over Europe. A concentration camp is just a place where certain people are kept in large numbers. The quote that I mentioned from Wiesenthal is in regard to death camps, that is, places people are specifically sent to be killed. If we're talking about concentration camps, perhaps you should also have mentioned the concentration camps scattered across the U.S. at the same time.

I myself deny the holohoax. This is because I have seen no evidence of the holohoax actually happening. But I have seen a ton of evidence to support that it didn't happen.

First we have the blueprints for the gas rooms in Auschwitz. These were clearly fabricated later. Interviews with surviving Jews, has shown that they apparently murdered 2.000 Jews for every gassing, in rooms were the doors were made of out wood, and they were only able to stand up. This would require extreme military training to do, thinking about the fact that they would have no room. They would panic and start pushing the door. This would completely obliterate the door, since it's made out of WOOD. A surviving Jew also said that other Jews would be in charge of dragging and burning all the gassed Jews, with only 3-4 guards guarding them. If they were 2.000 Jews + those that would have to drag and burn them against 3-4 guards, don't you think that they would have revolted? I mean, if they really gassed over 1 million Jews in total, don't you think at least ONE group of them would try to revolt? Apparently not. In an interview with the same Jew, who was one of the people who had to drag and burn the gassed Jews, he says that they would burn 3-4 corpses at a time in each of the ovens. This would even be impossible today, because we have 70-80% water in our bodies, so it would simply put out the fire. Another thing is that the ovens only had room for 2, if they really pushed. Also, the Jew said that it would take around 30-40 minutes to burn them all. A modern crematorium can burn 1 person in 1 hour. Burning 2 would double the time. So they could burn 15 people an hour. So let's say it take 30 minutes for 2000 people to get undressed. Then another 30 minutes for the 2000 people to go into the gas room and then die. That's 1 hour. Then it will take 1 more hour per 15'th person. So in hour 2, 1985 Jews are remaining to be burned. In hour 3 there will be 1970 Jews left, and so on. By hour 133 hours, you will have burned 15 people and only 5 to go. You can't physically kill 2.000 every day and then burn them the same day. The bodies would simply stack up. This is just a small part of the proof I have found in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-Kl6RHKIQk

It's not a question of "openness to all sides", it's a question of what motivates some people to deny or minimize the Holocaust. This is a legitimate psychological issue, although it is not really a historical one.

Some people are so virulently antisemitic that they are actually made uncomfortable when they come face to face with the ultimate result of antisemitism. It obviously makes it difficult for these people to live with themselves. So they deny the Holocaust in whole or in part.
It's as simple as that.

Evidence for it? We have mountains and mountains of evidence - documents, photos, film, eyewitness testimony, confessions from the Nazis, confessions from Nazis decades after the war (people who were in no danger of being arrested. People who had nothing to gain or lose by saying it did happen). - So much evidence that it would be IMPOSSIBLE to fabricate all of it.

Evidence against it? Well we have a handful of books that deny it. Most of these books were written by people with an agenda; they are neo-nazis themselves or follow some other racist ideology. Most of these authors are not scholars; they have no degree in history or any other relevant subject. Most of them are too young to have been there (whereas the witnesses are, or were, old enough to have been there). Much of their evidence has been disproven, shown to be inaccurate, or not relevant. When confronted with evidence, most of them simply claim "it's a forgery." -

They deny the H. for their own particular personal/political reasons, then seek out data to support them. The biggest thing they push is population statistics of Jewish people, which in one particular Almanac, show the same numbers in 1939 and 1945. This point is nonsense, because it ignores the footnote for that 1945 number, stating that 1939 is the last year that reliable data is available.